Jury suspended from a North Miami officer who shot an unarmed guard with an autistic man

Breaking News Emails

Receive last minute alerts and special reports. News and stories that matter, delivered in the morning on weekdays.

March 15, 2019, 22:40 GMT

By Doha Madani

The North Miami police officer, who shot an unarmed caregiver of an autistic man in 2016, was found not guilty of a guilty negligence head on Friday, while the jury returned undecided on three other counts.

Agent Jonathan Aledda was seen on a mobile phone filming Charles Kinsey, a behavioral therapist, even after he said to the police that he was not armed and was that the man sitting on the ground next to him was autistic. Kinsey was shot in the leg but survived.

Officer Jonathan Aledda addressed the jury for the first time during the shooting of Charles Kinsey, behavioral therapist in 2016, on March 13, 2019.NBC Miami

Aledda was on trial for two counts of attempted manslaughter and two counts of culpable negligence for the July 2016 murder.

The judge said that a hearing would be held on March 27 to determine how they would proceed on the remaining three charges, according to NBC Miami.

Police were alerted at the scene in 2016 after the report of a man who was walking with a gun and was threatening to kill.

Kinsey told the police that he was unarmed and that the man sitting next to him was autistic and was holding a toy truck – and not a gun like the one I had. had claimed a 911 caller.

The video of the incident became viral after many perceived it as an apparent example of excessive police against a black man without weapons.

Aledda said in a statement through the intermediary of his union, after the incident, that "I did what I had to do in a split second to get there and that I hated to hear that others describe me as something that I am not. "

Katherine Fernandez Rundle, the Miami-Dade County Attorney General, said in a statement on Friday that her team would discuss "the appropriate course of action regarding unresolved charges".

"The difficulties posed by this case are clearly illustrated by the inability of the jury to decide on three of the four offending offenses," the statement said.